There are at least two issues at play here. (1) Should IT professionals submit to testing when other professionals do not? This is an ethical question about equitable treatment, but even if the answer is no, it may be that IT professionals should still be tested because testing improves hiring decisions, and this in turn promotes expertise and culls the field of more inept professionals.
This leads to the second question that (I believe) isn't addressed here: (2) Are the tests valid, in the sense that the reliably predict performance on the job? Most standardized tests of academic achievement and potential are empirically validated, and the results are published for all to see. This practice promotes good tests, and weeds out bad ones. If all IT tests are bad tests, then no one should take them. Does anyone here have the facts on question 2?
Slashdot Mirror
There are at least two issues at play here. (1) Should IT professionals submit to testing when other professionals do not? This is an ethical question about equitable treatment, but even if the answer is no, it may be that IT professionals should still be tested because testing improves hiring decisions, and this in turn promotes expertise and culls the field of more inept professionals. This leads to the second question that (I believe) isn't addressed here: (2) Are the tests valid, in the sense that the reliably predict performance on the job? Most standardized tests of academic achievement and potential are empirically validated, and the results are published for all to see. This practice promotes good tests, and weeds out bad ones. If all IT tests are bad tests, then no one should take them. Does anyone here have the facts on question 2?